We tested each truck's acceleration when empty and then with 1,500 pounds in the bed. Although testing was primarily about the fuel economy these trucks achieve, the 2015 Ford F-150 with the EcoBoost 2.7-liter was the hot rod among these competitors. It was nearly as fast as its bigger brother, the EcoBoost 3.5-liter we tested in our Texas Truck Showdown 2016: Max Towing competition.

How They Ran Empty

The F-150 with the EcoBoost 2.7-liter posted a zero-to-60-mph of 6.36 seconds, and it did the quarter-mile in 14.9 seconds at 96.5 mph. The "hot rod" label is right, with this little displacement engine making a stout 325 horsepower and 375 pounds-feet of torque in a truck weighing 480 pounds less than the next-lightest truck in the competition (the 2016 Toyota Tundra weighs 5,160 pounds; the F-150 2.7-liter weighs 4,680 pounds). Unlike the EcoBoost 3.5-liter that overpowered its rear tires, the EcoBoost 2.7-liter left the starting line with much less drama. The secret combo was setting the driving mode to Sport, putting the locking differential on and then building engine speed to about 2,000 rpm against the brakes and letting the truck rip off the line.

In second place for the zero-to-60 run was the 2016 Chevrolet Silverado with its 355 hp and 383 pounds-feet of torque created by its 5.3-liter V-8, which was paired with an all-new eight-speed automatic transmission. The Silverado launched off the line with its steep 4.56:1 1st-gear ratio combined with a 3.42 axle ratio, but its 6.96 seconds to 60 mph wasn't enough to catch the F-150; the Silverado crossed the quarter-mile finish line in 15.3 seconds at 93.3 mph. The Silverado's V-8 always seemed to be in a sweet spot of making power with the closely geared eight-speed, and it made up time in the back half of the track finishing 0.4 seconds behind the F-150 in the quarter-mile, versus 0.6 behind in its zero-to-60 time.

The completely stripped 4.6-liter Tundra work truck did zero-to-60 in 7.70 seconds and the quarter-mile in 16.2 seconds at 88 mph with no drama from the tires; I just mashed the accelerator and went. Chugging along in last was the 2016 Ram EcoDiesel with a zero-to-60 time of 8.90 seconds, and a quarter-mile run in 16.9 seconds at 83.9 mph. The biggest issue with the Ram EcoDiesel was that it was not equipped with Ram's limited-slip differential, so the 3.0-liter's 420 pounds-feet of torque went up in smoke, leaving a single 30-foot-long tire patch from the starting line. Unfortunately, the HFE EcoDiesel trim we tested cannot be equipped with Ram's optional limited-slip differential, though other EcoDiesel trim levels can.

How They Ran Loaded

Finish order was unchanged, even with 1,500 pounds of rock salt bags over the rear axle. We kept the weight even from truck to truck to see how well they each carried a heavy load. Again, the F-150's power-to-weight ratio proved unstoppable. It ran the zero-to-60 in 7.80 seconds and the quarter-mile in 16.1 seconds at 89.5 mph. In fact, it set the pace and was faster than many of the trucks tested in our Max Towing Showdown.

The Ram diesel handled the extra weight exceptionally well, with the least falloff in performance from empty to loaded, losing only 1 second in zero-to-60 (8.9 versus 9.9 seconds) and a scant 0.5 seconds in quarter-mile times (16.9 at 83.9 mph to 17.4 at 79.6 mph). The Silverado's eight-speed transmission gave it a wallop of acceleration from a dead stop, even without a pair of turbochargers or a turbocharged diesel engine under the hood. Smack the accelerator and the engine immediately jumped to 2,000 rpm, accelerating to 20 mph faster than the F-150 (1.5 seconds to 1.58 seconds) before the Ford picked up steam and ran off with the win.

Completely unacceptable practice to use a locked up rear differential in the real world.
This effectively means you were cheating, skewing the results to Ford's favor.

A correct, agnostic approach would be just to have the driver floor the gas pedal: that would show how much latency there is in the engine, how well sorted the chassis is, etc.

Posted by: George_C | Feb 15, 2016 9:41:17 AM

George_C - the locking diff disengages once speeds go higher than 35 mph. Oh and if I had it and was in a poor traction situation, I'd use it.

Posted by: Lou_BC | Feb 15, 2016 10:32:44 AM

The general sure knows how to make a real nice looking pickup.
Love the squared wheel wells compared to fords rainbows.
5.3 turns out to be a very good engine option.

Posted by: Squatting ford | Feb 15, 2016 11:00:42 AM

Will it disengage at full throttle? Will the programming cut power, so you coast for the duration of the unlock event?
Will it make it out of first gear before doing so?
It is for getting unstuck, rather than improving traction.

Frankly more 60% of America doesn't even consider a 4x2 pickup, a non-starter in the snow belt.

Posted by: George_C | Feb 15, 2016 11:09:49 AM

Theirs a lot of 4x2 trucks here in OH. I've never got stuck and always made it where I need to go disputed the weather. Some people have poor driving skills and yes they have to get 4x4.

Posted by: Tom | Feb 15, 2016 12:08:44 PM

George_C - as long as their isn't a difference in load between the tires it will disengage. I had a rental F150 EB 3.5 4x4 for 10 days. I personally did not like how the E-locker worked with traction and stability control. In really crappy weather having the locker disengage at 35 mph was a pain. I'd rather have a standard mechanical limited slip than e-locker. Companies should offer the same set up as in the Power Wagon which is limited slip with and E-locker override.

Posted by: Lou_BC | Feb 15, 2016 1:05:39 PM

Theirs a lot of 4x2 trucks here in OH. I've never got stuck and always made it where I need to go disputed the weather. Some people have poor driving skills and yes they have to get 4x4.

Hell I never wear seat belts, here in OH we don't get into accidents. We're still alive. Some people have poor driving skills, a soft head and yes they have to get seat belts.

Posted by: Tom | Feb 15, 2016 1:34:37 PM

Theirs a lot of 4x2 trucks here in OH. I've never got stuck and always made it where I need to go disputed the weather. Some people have poor driving skills and yes they have to get 4x4.

I never wear seat belts, here in OH we don't get into accidents. We're still alive. Some people have poor driving skills, a soft head and yes they have to get seat belts.

Posted by: Tom | Feb 15, 2016 1:35:02 PM

Stopping is the biggest safety factor when driving on snow and ice.

Posted by: Tom | Feb 15, 2016 3:55:08 PM

I never wear seat belts, here in OH we don't get into accidents. We're still alive. Some people have poor driving skills, a soft head and yes they have to get seat belts.
Posted by: Tom | Feb 15, 2016 1:35:02 PM
/QUOTE

Hope those will not be your Famous last words,LOL

Long time ago..I was driving quite slow in town when some young punk without licence and insurance,,going oposite direction lost control and hit me head on..
Having lap belt on saved me from serious harm but still my chest bent the steering wheel and the van was totaled..

Long time ago..I was driving quite slow in town when some young punk without licence and insurance,,going oposite direction lost control and hit me head on..
Having lap belt on saved me from serious harm but still my chest bent the steering wheel and the van was totaled..

I think you just replied to a troulllll. rolling loser of beer has been using multiple user names all day. This looks like another one.

Posted by: LMAO | Feb 15, 2016 7:09:57 PM

Did you start all of the trucks up against the torque converter? The way the article reads, it was only done in the Ford.

Posted by: mark49 | Feb 15, 2016 7:20:00 PM

Sounds like this site "always" finds a way to make the Ford the quickest...

Why not leave it in drive and floor it ? and try to ensure to find the spot where other trucks don't spin and run multiple tests ..

I am a racer and know I can get a lot of time off by loading the convertor and ensuring I don't boil the tires..

Not bring the rpm's up with the lockers on then floor it, unfair...and only done in the Ford,odd,just odd..

While you just boil the RAM's tires for 30 feet...

Bloody idiotic test !! Totally biased..What did the Chev do ?

Toyota was the only fair test..it didn't spin the tires,just went !

Not enough power/torque to spin on take off that's a true time,but if you would have loaded the torque conv up then floored it,you could have shaved a lot of time off the times,so unfair,only Ford you do it to get the TWO Turbo's fully working,odd !

Whats next..Drag test for the Ford on a prepped track in Southern California and the rest in Nebraska in a -20 snow storm in the dead of winter,sounds about right !

I just laugh at the results from this site,biased beyond comprehension.....

Ford you loaded up the convertor to get quicker times...

Dodge you let it spin,probably the Chevy as well

Toyota it hooked without spinning,so why not load the conv as well,1/2 second quicker times could have been done,or better...

This site is 100% Furd Biased...I guess your buddy Levine works for Furd,what a crock !

Posted by: Biased test again by PUTC | Feb 15, 2016 9:40:00 PM

At least you know the Tundra which has a 6 year old engine (the same engine found in the Lexus GX460) will still be standing in about 5 years. The Ford will already be in the same place as were the guys from "that truck got a Hemi?" commercials recycle their beer cans!

Posted by: Scott | Feb 16, 2016 12:17:54 AM

At least you know the Tundra which has a 6 year old engine (the same engine found in the Lexus GX460) will still be standing in about 5 years. The Ford will already be in the same place as were the guys from "that truck got a Hemi?" commercials recycle their beer cans!

Posted by: Scott | Feb 16, 2016 12:17:54 AM

Fyi for all you guys that think you drag race look at the mph. That is not from launching, that it pulling power to the top.

Posted by: LMAO | Feb 16, 2016 6:00:01 AM

Fyi for all you guys that think you drag race look at the mph. That is not from launching, that it pulling power to the top.

Posted by: LMAO | Feb 16, 2016 6:00:01 AM

But the ET is all about the first 60 feet.

Posted by: andrwken | Feb 16, 2016 6:44:14 AM

But the ET is all about the first 60 feet.

Posted by: andrwken | Feb 16, 2016 6:44:14 AM

It is only part of the ET. Remember they are doing 1/4 mile and not 1/8th. Everyone wants the hole shot but it doesn't always work out.

Posted by: LMAO | Feb 16, 2016 6:49:51 AM

Also remember these trucks are far from fast. These are production work vehicles with impressive 1/4 mile and 0-60 times. Trying for the best 60 foot is ridiculous. I mean seriously, 17 second times. How much rearly would be improved with a full locker and slicks. The mph tells the real story. Slow!

Posted by: LMAO | Feb 16, 2016 7:11:20 AM

@Lmao: wow, now you say you have owned a lightning. Interesting, why did you get rid of it? Poor/rough unstable idle, maybe some detonation on throttle tip in from idle? Too bad you didn't understand the full function of a bypass valve, you may still enjoy owning it. Oh well, live and learn, right. LMAO!

Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Feb 16, 2016 9:09:02 AM

But the ET is all about the first 60 feet.

Posted by: andrwken | Feb 16, 2016 6:44:14 AM

It is only part of the ET. Remember they are doing 1/4 mile and not 1/8th. Everyone wants the hole shot but it doesn't always work out.

Posted by: LMAO | Feb 16, 2016 6:49:51 AM

If you can't get out of the hole, you won't have a great ET. The 9.5 second NHRA Super Gas car we ran only went through the lights at 135. But the 60 ft. was 1.25. These trucks can pull over 100 mph now ungoverned and they won't touch those numbers because they can't launch.

The launch is everything!

Posted by: andrwken | Feb 16, 2016 9:56:15 AM

The launch is everything!

Posted by: andrwken | Feb 16, 2016 9:56:15 AM

You are in a different world. We are discussing street cars on street tires in street trim. None of these trucks could ever see 100 mph trap speeds without mods. They are doing well though that is for sure but 60' does not mean you are going to have a high mph. Stick to street cars and not drag cars. Unless you want these test done with slicks.

Posted by: LMAO | Feb 16, 2016 10:47:02 AM

Fyi they are not bracket racing either where your reaction time or hole shot means anything. Remember, street trucks.

Posted by: LMAO | Feb 16, 2016 10:48:02 AM

Lmao: wow, now you say you have owned a lightning. Interesting, why did you get rid of it? Poor/rough unstable idle, maybe some detonation on throttle tip in from idle? Too bad you didn't understand the full function of a bypass valve, you may still enjoy owning it. Oh well, live and learn, right. LMAO!

Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Feb 16, 2016 9:09:02 AM

Wow, you are just a complete idiot. I have said I owned a Lighting here for quite a while. That is nothing new. Stick to the Internet you complete moron because real cars and trucks are beyond you. Nothing wrong with the ride or 1/4 mile times. You really are clueless on suoercharging. Maybe you can hit up some forums on the 3.8 guys who disable their bypass valve. How's your pos cobalt going. You must feel like a realot man in that.LMAO. what a complete fool.

Posted by: LMAO | Feb 16, 2016 10:55:00 AM

@LMAO : Well I correctly predicted the 5.3 Silverado getting better fuel FE than the 2.7 ECOBUST when run empty and I even provided an educated explanation as to why. Not bad for a guy who knows nothing about real cars and trucks, huh?

Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Feb 16, 2016 11:50:03 AM

The launch is everything!

Posted by: andrwken | Feb 16, 2016 9:56:15 AM

You are in a different world. We are discussing street cars on street tires in street trim. None of these trucks could ever see 100 mph trap speeds without mods. They are doing well though that is for sure but 60' does not mean you are going to have a high mph. Stick to street cars and not drag cars. Unless you want these test done with slicks.

////////

I believe the test on this site showed the 6.2 limiting itself 100ft from the finish. It's very likely that truck would have gone over 100 MPH. Drag racing is drag racing no matter what you throw on the track, the physics don't change because they threw slicks on it or because you need to make a point.

The real point is how they launch plays a bigger part in how they ET than the MPH on the top end.

Bracket racing is irrelevant, same physics apply to making a vehicle record a time on the track whether it's a truck, or a built for the track race car. How well it runs depends on how the driver can launch it. You act like because it's not a race car it has a different set of rules. They really don't. Just a different set of results.

Posted by: andrwken | Feb 16, 2016 12:08:24 PM

LMAO sold his Ford Lighting after getting beat by Honda Civics, Toyota Corollas, and Chevy Cobalts. Plus he was broke, since he needed to rebuild his cheap crappy Lighting after every drive LMBO!

Posted by: johnny doe | Feb 16, 2016 4:25:21 PM

LMAO sold his Ford Lighting after getting beat by Honda Civics, Toyota Corollas, and Chevy Cobalts. Plus he was broke, since he needed to rebuild his cheap crappy Lighting after every drive LMBO!

Posted by: johnny doe | Feb 16, 2016 4:25:21 PM

That probably explains his detest for cobalts, he got smoked by one at the track. LOL.

Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Feb 16, 2016 4:36:55 PM

I believe the test on this site showed the 6.2 limiting itself 100ft from the finish. It's very likely that truck would have gone over 100 MPH. Drag racing is drag racing no matter what you throw on the track, the physics don't change because they threw slicks on it or because you need to make a point.

The real point is how they launch plays a bigger part in how they ET than the MPH on the top end.

Bracket racing is irrelevant, same physics apply to making a vehicle record a time on the track whether it's a truck, or a built for the track race car. How well it runs depends on how the driver can launch it. You act like because it's not a race car it has a different set of rules. They really don't. Just a different set of results.

Posted by: andrwken | Feb 16, 2016 12:08:24 PM

You have to remember that you cannot launch every truck the same. Different hp and tq, different tires, different gearing, etc. So what works for one does not mean it works for all. I don't recall them saying the chivies having spinning issues so it sound like they launched ok. You didn't see all the Ford people crying like the GM girls because the 3.5L needed a 2nd gear launch. Imagine if there was good enough traction for a 1st gear launch.

Posted by: LMAO | Feb 16, 2016 4:55:10 PM

@LMAO, Good drivers are now running mid 10's in bone stock Z06 Vettes. How? They launch them in 2nd gear. GM has very intrusive torque management. I didn't say PUTC didn't power jack the other trucks. I simply asked if all the trucks were launched the same. Would the Chevy have made up .6 if they did and it helped? No way. What it quite obvious to me is that the dyno results were largely dictated by transmission gearing and programming. Does the Ford actually make 2hp less and 50lb ft more than the Chevy? By your logic- quarter mile mph- no, since they Chevy is within 3mph but weighs 660lbs more. Like I said in the other article, different approaches to the same problem with very similar results. You pick Ford and that is fine.

Posted by: mark49 | Feb 16, 2016 5:55:04 PM

What it quite obvious to me is that the dyno results were largely dictated by transmission gearing and programming. Does the Ford actually make 2hp less and 50lb ft more than the Chevy? By your logic- quarter mile mph- no, since they Chevy is within 3mph but weighs 660lbs more. Like I said in the other article, different approaches to the same problem with very similar results. You pick Ford and that is fine.

Posted by: mark49 | Feb 16, 2016 5:55:04 PM

I agree with the dyno results. I had to look up the GM and ZF transmission ratios and they have a 1:1 ratio which is typically where you do the dyno run in. The Ford 6r80 does not have a 1:1 ratio. So unless they did the pull in 5th which does not seem likely they made the pull in 4th and that was underdriven. So there was gearing advantage during the dyno pull. The only thing I do not know is if there is a entry in the program to enter all gearing for the final numbers.

Posted by: LMAO | Feb 17, 2016 6:40:04 AM

Personally, I consider this test rigged in Ford's favor. If all the other trucks started from idle and the Ford started pre-loaded as it were, there's no question the Ford gets the advantage even with the smaller engine. However, the everyday driver running traffic light to traffic light is not going to pre-load the engine or set the locker at ever light.

"Frankly more 60% of America doesn't even consider a 4x2 pickup, a non-starter in the snow belt."

True. But that doesn't mean there aren't those even in the snow belt that have a 4x2 for basic utility and lower cost. The vast majority of fleet trucks especially are 4x2, not 4x4 unless the fleet operator KNOWS that their fleet will be operating in off-road or foul weather conditions. Yes, where I live the vast majority of private-owner pickups are 4x4, but move south even 100 miles and that ratio begins to shift and in the region I used to live in before coming up to the snow belt myself, 4x4 was the exception, not the rule. If a truck had 4x4 there, it was more for the fun of off-roading than any practical need. Even now, I own one single 4x4 and it's not my pickup truck.

@Roadwhale, was the other test rigged where the 6.2L GM was able to run a faster time than the 3.5L Ford and the Ford was launched in 2nd gear? Just think of the HUGE gearing advantage of the 6.2 with the 8 speed and the use of 1st gear. The fanbabies are hilarious on this site when they don't get their way. Maybe some you guys can start your own review website so everything goes exactly how you want it to.

Posted by: LMAO | Feb 17, 2016 9:29:38 AM

@LMAO : If GM had put those lame fuel saving tires on the their 6.2 you would have to start the thing out in 3rd or 4th gear to prevent wheel spin. Hey, I can't blame ford for using those tires, they need every trick to save face.

Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Feb 17, 2016 2:49:12 PM

@LMAO : If GM had put those lame fuel saving tires on the their 6.2 you would have to start the thing out in 3rd or 4th gear to prevent wheel spin. Hey, I can't blame ford for using those tires, they need every trick to save face.

Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Feb 17, 2016 2:49:12 PM

Maybe but not likely. The 6.2 makes no torque till you wind it out. Heck, they needed the extra gearing in the 8 speed just to make it competitive with F150 with an engine from 2011 and a transmission from 2010. Before the 6.2 with the 6 speed was pathetic. That 6.2 needs that really low gearing.

Posted by: LMAO | Feb 17, 2016 4:05:51 PM

Maybe but not likely. The 6.2 makes no torque till you wind it out. Heck, they needed the extra gearing in the 8 speed just to make it competitive with F150 with an engine from 2011 and a transmission from 2010. Before the 6.2 with the 6 speed was pathetic. That 6.2 needs that really low gearing.

Posted by: LMAO | Feb 17, 2016 4:05:51 PM

As usual your pathetic. The review posted below of the 6.2 with a 6 speed has 0-60 in an 5.4 seconds. Read it and enjoy.

Enjoy what? Knowing the word pathetic is a word you hear all the time towards you by your wife? Funny how those numbers are quite different than the results here......... you would also think an engine with considerable more HP and torque with the benifit would also not be able to launch in first gear no matter what tires are on it. I still laugh at you all the time. You really try hard to be smart. But epic fail after epic fail. Must be rough being as sad as you. It is hard for me to imagine being as sad as you.

I still laugh at you all the time. You really try hard to be smart. But epic fail after epic fail.

Posted by: LMAO | Feb 17, 2016 8:31:09 PM

Wow, that is freaky, that' how I think of you.

Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Feb 17, 2016 9:31:27 PM

Wow, that is freaky, that' how I think of you.

Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Feb 17, 2016 9:31:27 PM

Is that all you could come up with. A "I know you are but what am i". What a loser. To bad you are brain washed putz. All that energy you spend trying to be half smart is just wasted on what you think GM is telling you.

Why do I have a poor idle? Rough idle or high idle speeds are usually caused by a vacuum leak. It can also be caused by a more air into the manifold than the short duration cam will let into the cylinder. This causes the high boost level. The air piles up in the intake manifold and gives a high boost pressure.

Again, thank you, you really are pathetic. Anyway, stock arguing with an automotive mechanic and you won't always be proven wrong.

Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Feb 17, 2016 10:24:44 PM

Did you really read what what said and explained or did you think you read what was said. You are the farthest from a mechanic I have witnessed. For one you call yourself a mechanic. That is a pep boys tire changer. When you are a technician come and talk to me then.

YOU really do not know how boost is made in an engine at all. Not a single clue. In fact the answer was kind of in what you just quoted. WOW you just proved yourself a complete fool. Well I guess you are a cobalt guy. Man I might just pee myself from the laughter right now.

When you want to have a serious discussion about forced induction let me know. I would actually like to have a realistic conversation without all your GM biased crap.

Posted by: LMAO | Feb 17, 2016 10:33:52 PM

@LMAO : Your starting to ramble. I have noticed that before when I have proven you wrong. Again, thanks for proving me correct with that link you posted. You really need to know when to quit. Nobody other than Lionel, Tom and the others you post as believes anything you say.

Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Feb 17, 2016 10:57:35 PM

See, your to dumb to even see where your wrong. You actually posted it in your quote. Yup, a simple back yard mechanic you are. Go a head and change some more tires because you are lost with anything beyond that.

Posted by: LMAO | Feb 17, 2016 10:59:59 PM

Engine has vacuum at low RPM.
This is normal while the engine is not under boost.

Why do I have a poor idle? Rough idle or high idle speeds are usually caused by a vacuum leak. It can also be caused by a more air into the manifold than the short duration cam will let into the cylinder. This causes the high boost level. The air piles up in the intake manifold and gives a high boost pressure.

Again, thank you, you really are pathetic. Anyway, stock arguing with an automotive mechanic and you won't always be proven wrong.

Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Feb 17, 2016 10:24:44 PM

Ok I have to apologize for any back yard mechanic out there that I insulted by saying sobaltsrgreat is one. He is not even close to being that smart. He actually jumped a page when he copied and pasted that quote. That is why the sentence did not flow right. It is actually:

Why do I have a poor idle? Rough idle or high idle speeds are
usually caused by a vacuum leak. It can also be caused by a radical camshaft, incorrect ignition timing or improperly adjusted
carburetor(s).

Yes cobaltsrgreat you are that dumb!

Posted by: LMAO | Feb 17, 2016 11:16:50 PM

@GMSGREAT, LMAO you guys need to take a time-out.

Today's engines have so many electronic management features--traditional backyard mechanic's techniques are less useful here.

A vacuum leak upsets the ratio (of air-fuel). Without an ideal air fuel ratio, an engine cannot perform up to its designed optimum. Whether you have a supercharger or not.

Posted by: papa jim | Feb 17, 2016 11:29:12 PM

@ LMAO : This whole thing started by you calling me out on the fact that positive displacement superchargers are capable of creating boost while at idle. You said , it doesn't and you kept it up until tonight when you mistakenly posted the link that only confirms what I have been saying all along. Hey, i'm not trying make you look clueless, you are do a great job of that to yourself. Fortunately, anyone can click the link you posted, read through the instruction section and discover for themselves how superchargers work and how they create boost at idle. Now can we move on to your next lesson. LMAO!

Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Feb 17, 2016 11:49:10 PM

To an extent papa jim. Adaptive fuel tables will adjust the fuel pulse width to correct for a vacuum leak up to the calibration limits. After that you will start seeing idle issues along with a CEL.

Posted by: LMAO | Feb 17, 2016 11:49:50 PM

@ LMAO : This whole thing started by you calling me out on the fact that positive displacement superchargers are capable of creating boost while at idle. You said , it doesn't and you kept it up until tonight when you mistakenly posted the link that only confirms what I have been saying all along. Hey, i'm not trying make you look clueless, you are do a great job of that to yourself. Fortunately, anyone can click the link you posted, read through the instruction section and discover for themselves how superchargers work and how they create boost at idle. Now can we move on to your next lesson. LMAO!

Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Feb 17, 2016 11:49:10 PM

You cannot read or post a correct quote. You are completely wrong and you are trying to back pedal. Reread it. You are wrong, 100%.